Pheu Thai And Red Shirts Do Nothing To Help Their Own

[h90]

Good answer. And i'm glad that the Thai people are opening their eyes to what democracy is... what the reds now need to do as and when this current flooding disaster is over. Is to tell the world what they consider democracy is in their eyes (to many ex communists can spoil the view, especially with red villages)

Well, the main initiator of the Red Village movement is hardly a communist - he is a retired police officer.

Anyhow, good night, i really am sort of discussed out.

When has a job ever defined your political, social ideal. You can have communist police officers the same as communist doctors or communist university lecturers.

The same way you can have good cops and bad cops. Or cops that end up being multi millionaires. Look at the larger middle / upper class families they tend to have at least one member who is a cop. Wonder why?

Good night Nick. Have a good sleep and be back here tomorro for another round of enlightening conversation

You have to look at Thai history and specifics here. It is more than unlikely to have communist police officers, given the civil war between communists and and the state in the past, and the way how police officers are trained and indoctrinated. Only the 2006 military coup and the Nong Bo funeral incident have changed the parameters regarding the police force's ideological and political indoctrination.

There is also quite a misconception regarding what it means to be a "communist". Generally speaking - it is not enough to just declare oneself a "communist". Being left leaning is not being a "communist". Communists have to go through very rigid party schooling, ideological indoctrination and are part of a very strict party hierarchy. The political education/indoctrination of the UDD schools have nothing in common with communist indoctrination, they are at most very slightly left leaning (and which in most European countries would be considered established party program of even conservative parties). The former communists in leading positions of the UDD have long realized that communist ideology is simply not acceptable to the majority of the Red Shirts.

There are a few small Red Shirt organizations who are more radical leftist in their ideology, but not what i would call "communist", even though older individual members are still communists. But personally i do not see this as a problem. Maybe because i am European, and in most European countries we perfectly legal communist/socialist parties, which at times are even part of coalition governments.

you talk nonsense. I came direct from the border to communist countries and their organizations often DO NOT have very rigid party schooling, ideological indoctrination and strict party hierarchy.

Often they are organized like a holiday organization with a bit discussion on the evenings and making the decisions together in the community. Only when they are in power they get strict hierarchys, like we have it here, with Thaksin has all the power. But even than they keep the other organizations which have to attract new members very loose and free.

Beside that there are huge differences between different kind of communists, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Tito are very different and there is always the discussion which is the right way.

Nick: you talk like you know something, but in real life you have never seen any communist organizations from inside, or? More the armchair communist you are, or?

[hammered]

Go ask the people in the flood zones. I am sure they could answer your question. I have listened to people from Pathum Thani and Nonthaburi but think it serves understanding better to listen personally.

Politics is all about perception.

Right. Politics is all about perception, and very little about reality.

You're the one going on about how Bangkok should have been flooded. Why don't you answer the question?

Im the one going on about how Sukhumband is reviled by many people for not allowing water to pass through BKK. I dont have to defend the governor and have no intention of doing so. Im sure everyone is aware of the political implications of rich, old, central BKK being considered differently form absolutely everywhere else. All I'm doing is pointing out how people see this. Whether they are right or wrong in their thoughts is my problem but a problem that needs to be addressed by the party that controls BKK for rather obvious political reasons especially now the media have exposed how even after the emergency decree Sukhumband found ways to ignore Yingluck. By the way, media activist Supinya pointed out very early when waters were descending on BKK that if the centre was not flooded, an explanation of why would have to be given. That was a very astute and early call.

[whybother]

Im the one going on about how Sukhumband is reviled by many people for not allowing water to pass through BKK. I dont have to defend the governor and have no intention of doing so. Im sure everyone is aware of the political implications of rich, old, central BKK being considered differently form absolutely everywhere else. All I'm doing is pointing out how people see this. Whether they are right or wrong in their thoughts is my problem but a problem that needs to be addressed by the party that controls BKK for rather obvious political reasons especially now the media have exposed how even after the emergency decree Sukhumband found ways to ignore Yingluck. By the way, media activist Supinya pointed out very early when waters were descending on BKK that if the centre was not flooded, an explanation of why would have to be given. That was a very astute and early call.

It will be very interesting to hear why Yingluck didn't flood Bangkok. She continued with Sukhumband's "we will protect Bangkok" rhetoric after she enabled the Disaster Act.

[nicknostitz]

you talk nonsense. I came direct from the border to communist countries and their organizations often DO NOT have very rigid party schooling, ideological indoctrination and strict party hierarchy.

Often they are organized like a holiday organization with a bit discussion on the evenings and making the decisions together in the community. Only when they are in power they get strict hierarchys, like we have it here, with Thaksin has all the power. But even than they keep the other organizations which have to attract new members very loose and free.

Beside that there are huge differences between different kind of communists, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Tito are very different and there is always the discussion which is the right way.

Nick: you talk like you know something, but in real life you have never seen any communist organizations from inside, or? More the armchair communist you are, or?

Ignoring the personal attacks - you are wrong.

I have had several school friends that joined communist parties in Germany in the 80's, one, for example joined the DKP (Deutsche Kommunistische Partei), several others of my age group joined the SDAJ (Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Jugend - the DKP's youth organisation), but i have long lost touch with them. They have had rigid schooling in all aspects of Communism, took regular organized study trips to East Germany and other communist countries. The longer they were part of these organizations the more impossible it became to have a normal conversation with them as all they could talk about what what they were indoctrinated in, and constantly tried to convince me to join as well. Which i didn't.

And no, i am not a communist. I do not even have very defined political leanings, other than that i am slightly left leaning in social issues, and rather liberal. I have many very good friends that are conservative (in many aspects i share their value system, most of my relatives are conservative as well), and many others that are social-democrat. Some of them are actively involved in the respective political parties in Europe.

[hammered]

Im the one going on about how Sukhumband is reviled by many people for not allowing water to pass through BKK. I dont have to defend the governor and have no intention of doing so. Im sure everyone is aware of the political implications of rich, old, central BKK being considered differently form absolutely everywhere else. All I'm doing is pointing out how people see this. Whether they are right or wrong in their thoughts is my problem but a problem that needs to be addressed by the party that controls BKK for rather obvious political reasons especially now the media have exposed how even after the emergency decree Sukhumband found ways to ignore Yingluck. By the way, media activist Supinya pointed out very early when waters were descending on BKK that if the centre was not flooded, an explanation of why would have to be given. That was a very astute and early call.

It will be very interesting to hear why Yingluck didn't flood Bangkok. She continued with Sukhumband's "we will protect Bangkok" rhetoric after she enabled the Disaster Act.

We are talking about control of watergates. As revealed today by a media member Sukhumband found ways to get round Yingluck and Frocs orders to open watergates. No politician is going to say "we will flood.....". It is about allowing water to flow through central BKK which may result in some flooding or not. Mind you if the height of the flood is 1.8 m in Don Muang and rising I wouldnt be surprised to see more dykes ripped down as yesterday whatever decisions get made. If it reaches life threatening levels there is really little choice

[siampolee]

One does need to remember that Bangkok is the financial centre of Thailand and the families with the financial clout would do all they could to preserve their corporate empires.

Yingluck and her family are probably one of the leading financial stakeholders in this country and as such she, or to be fair her brother would act covertly to secure their investments,

Wheels within wheels, the decisions were not made by those involved in the overt governance and indeed overt running of and the managing of both Thailand and Bangkok if the truth of the matter be known.

None of us will ever be privy to the truth concerning the matter will we ?

I seem to recall that Yingluck did state that the ( where the money is) centre of Bangkok would be protected at all costs,. or words to that effect

Edited October 31, 2011 by siampolee

[Thaddeus]

One does need to remember that Bangkok is the financial centre of Thailand and the families with the financial clout would do all they could to preserve their corporate empires.

The rural areas of Thailand are the life-blood and Bangkok is the heart, the country needs both to work. You can lose a fair amount of blood and survive, but if the heart stops beating, your dead.

[siampolee]

Thaddeus # 397

The rural areas of Thailand are the life-blood and Bangkok is the heart, the country needs both to work. You can lose a fair amount of blood and survive, but if the heart stops beating, you're dead.

Totally agree Thaddeus.

I was trying to point out to some of the more blinkered members of T.V. that if they actually thought the figures they see are in charge they are indeed mistaken. whether we like it or not any nation would and does all it can to protect its financial heart.

Blame the governor of Bangkok if you like , however there was no doubt far more behind the scenes activity than we shall ever know, money buys power, power buys safety, no money no chance.

[Publicus]

[

You will note that I said the basis of modern journalism is "sound reasoning based on facts." (I am indeed aware of fact checking and fact checkers, thank you.) You of course recognize I am posting about general circulation daily and Sunday newspapers. As to specialization, reading the Economist or watching Bloomberg, I get a lot of facts, sources, and much else too by way of opinion (along with the appropriate disclaimers).

I take it that by "gutter journalism" you refer to the Murdoch clan and Board of Directors (excepting the WSJ)?

I think we also could agree that Journalism in a democracy such as Thailand's is comparable to the parliamentary system. As we would not expect the Thai parliamentary system to be of the same caliber and quality as that of the UK (ahem), neither should we expect Thai English language journalism to be on a par with the Times whether in London or New York - or the Washington Post for that matter. In 2007 after Thaksin was kicked out of Hong Kong, Phillip Bowering wrote an opinion column in the South China Morning Post that, if the former PM were to return to Thailand, he might do well to have learned something of the democratic government of HKG and to consider some of it as perhaps suitable to Thailand.

None of the publications mentioned by have ever been anything else than staunchly traditional in their journalistic approach.

Thanong's little scribbling is neither factual nor sound, as i have shown.

And you posting is neither as well - first you state that BP and the Nation are international standard publications, now you draw a rather strange parallel between the parliament and the quality of newpapers (Apples...Oranges...?), and now you state that BP and the Nation now cannot be compared to international standard publications. If you want to make a point, you can't change your line of argumentation just as convenient to you - that is usually just the reserve of politicians.

Government, politics, democracy, journalism are intertwined. They are perhaps a fruit salad. To try to apply the anaology of apples and oranges is wrong, self-limiting, off-center.

Kindly don't try to put words in my mouth either. Point out where I said the Nation and the BP are "international standard publications." You can't point it out because you said that, not me. I said the Nation and the BP are "respectable" journalism. Your disagreeing with Thanong's piece is insufficient grounds to claim it isn't journalism. If you or an actual journalist have facts that contradict Thanong's facts and interpretation, then present them for our consideration rather than issuing summary and arbitrary denounciatations of his soundly respectable journalism.

[sbk]

I have no idea what you two are bickering about but as far as I can tell it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Take it to PM or drop it, thanks

[Publicus]

I have no idea what you two are bickering about but as far as I can tell it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Take it to PM or drop it, thanks

Noted thx.

[yoshiwara]

Thaksin's apologists trying to get their act together. When they are saying let's drop the politics it is because they are trying to push away the spotlight from the response of this hopeless government (directed by Thaksin) whose main contribution has been to refuse declaring a SOE (can't be seen reliant on the army),....

Perhaps you can tell me what a SOE provides in term of powers that the current authorities don't already have have.I'm open minded but don't have the information to decide.I hope you will not go all quiet as have the others to whom I have posed this question.

It means of course that those in authority have the legal authority to strategicallycommand resources in an emergency. Not exactly rocket science, but refused by Thaksin for political reasons.

Why? because in a SOE the authority to command would overrule his civilian minions and they would be subordinate to the army authorities.

Would they do any better? Irrelevant. The situation demanded that they be given the authority. It is an emergency after all. Those arguing that the army is crap are doing so from Thakin's political position. Clearly and unambiguously.

The question is asked as a means of looking to whitewashing the refusal and propping up weakness not to mention supporting Thaksin. Open mind? I don't think so.

[yoshiwara]

Why would you ask for evidence and then completely ignore the link I posted?

Anyway, here it is:

It's the thin white sticker towards the front of the boat.

Thank you. That's what I was after. It is idiotic and clearly divisive. Thanks again.

Yes indeed, it is idiotic.

One thing though - i am not 100% sure, but the sign looks to me like one of the Red Shirt community radio station signs, and not the UDD sign. Whatever it is - this clearly goes against stated UDD policy - which is helping anybody regardless of politics.

Yes, I was wondering whether or not this sticker was from the UDD or a different, smaller faction. To people who hate the red shirts of course it makes no difference. This is a problem for the red shirt movement as friction between its factions - which there undoubtedly is - will lead to observers criticizing the entire movement for the actions of one faction.

One thing I'd like to know is how much better the average Thai voter of whichever political persuasion understands the makeup of the red shirt movement than, say, the average anti-red shirt poster on TVF. After all, it's the Thais who count when determining the extent of public support for whatever political group.

In the OP articles that fuel these threads, little attention is drawn to the factional makeup of the red shirt movement and I'm just wondering if the same can be said for articles in the Thai media in general, as my knowledge of Thai isn't good enough to understand the more formal language used in these publications.

Push, push a little harder and someone will complain it is a fake red sticker designed to discredit the reds. We're almost there with the well maybe just a faction of the reds, a small faction not really representative and so on. Funny how the reds seems always to provide plenty, but plenty of ammunition to feed those they accuse of being Thaksin/reds haters. Twisting in the wind.

[yoshiwara]

Hi Nick, I have the same observation on the ground here in Pathum Thani as you do, although more limited as I have not gone too far from our flooded house. Everyone here is pitching in to help, good spirits, I don't see any of the kind of thing that certifiable nutcase Thanong writes about.

I am afraid your plea will fall on deaf ears here. For reasons I cannot fathom TVF is a farang yellow shirt redoubt, slightly to the right of Attila the Hun politically. I know you are busy, but when you have time I would like to hear your theories of just why that is so? I know a few Thai red shirts opponents who would be ashamed by some of the crap washing up here. A lot of it is from people who could not understand directions in Thai to their corner 7/11, but somehow they are past masters of Thai current events. Mind boggling.

Mind boggling indeed.

In order to be accepted and qualified as unbiased here, one has to hate and despise the Red Shirts.

I have a few theories...

I can remember one elderly farang in the pink shirt protests (before they changed into the multi-colored's) who was screaming repeatedly into our cameras in horrible Thai that he loves Thailand, and is Thai ("phom rak prathet Thai - phom pen khon Thai"), which was rather embarrassing (i won't put the photo here, or publish it anywhere, i do not want to further embarrass him, but it was shown on Thai TV). To be fair - there was a similar incident in 2009, where in the middle of a speach by Somchai Wongsawat during the Red Shirt protests a farang interrupted the speech by screaming the same, that he loved Thailand, and hat he was Thai. I was on the stage taking pics, and really wished i wasn't there.

Another farang in one of the multi-colored protests, the one where they went to the 11th infantry regiment, shouted at me, as soon as he saw me with my camera (also in very bad Thai) if i want to interview him. I said no, and he told me to go away (which i anyhow was, as speaking with obviously mentally unstable farang is not really my thing).

On a nastier note, i had in 2008 several arguments with one or the other farang who worked as spies for the PAD, and followed me and other foreign journalists around PAD occupied Government House, and photographed us.

Thanks Nick. I still wonder what caused them to identify so thoroughly with one faction in Thai politics to the point of quasi-insanity? Some enterprising grad student could make a name for his/her self with a dissertation dissecting this phenomena. Stay safe out there!

A misunderstanding laid on with a trowel. No not identify with one faction (thats for the red cheerleader). Rather opposition to the manipulation of Thailand by one crook and his subalterns.

Simple and focussed and this is what drives the Thaksin apologists up the wall however much they attempt to re-write and re-manipulate the agenda.

[yoshiwara]

So Nick, you would agree then that they are still Communists, they just don't want to have the violence, is that it? And if they are Communists then just what is the ultimate goal as far as they are concerned for Thailand? Just what is Tilda's strategic vision? A one party democracy, Governed by a President is the set up most Communists wish for. I fear that Red will be the colour of this fair lands streets.

No, they are not communists anymore.

No, Tida has on numerous occasions in public (and in private conversations) said that her movement is about respecting the outcome of elections, whichever party will win. There has been no indication and no evidence whatsoever that there are aspirations of the UDD, or of the Red Shirts as a whole, towards a one party state.

This strange notion is only flying around here on Thaivisa.

The Stalinist method of saying one thing and doing something else entirely is alive and well. One of the Stalinist traditions is that of the Popular Front (see both the 1930s and the Life of Brian) Unfortunately selling the popular front in Thailand by the remnants of the CP amounts to nothing more than tail-ending Thaksin who is happy to use them and spit them out whenever he fancies doing so.

[yoshiwara]

you talk nonsense. I came direct from the border to communist countries and their organizations often DO NOT have very rigid party schooling, ideological indoctrination and strict party hierarchy.

Often they are organized like a holiday organization with a bit discussion on the evenings and making the decisions together in the community. Only when they are in power they get strict hierarchys, like we have it here, with Thaksin has all the power. But even than they keep the other organizations which have to attract new members very loose and free.

Beside that there are huge differences between different kind of communists, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Tito are very different and there is always the discussion which is the right way.

Nick: you talk like you know something, but in real life you have never seen any communist organizations from inside, or? More the armchair communist you are, or?

Ignoring the personal attacks - you are wrong.

I have had several school friends that joined communist parties in Germany in the 80's, one, for example joined the DKP (Deutsche Kommunistische Partei), several others of my age group joined the SDAJ (Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Jugend - the DKP's youth organisation), but i have long lost touch with them. They have had rigid schooling in all aspects of Communism, took regular organized study trips to East Germany and other communist countries. The longer they were part of these organizations the more impossible it became to have a normal conversation with them as all they could talk about what what they were indoctrinated in, and constantly tried to convince me to join as well. Which i didn't.

And no, i am not a communist. I do not even have very defined political leanings, other than that i am slightly left leaning in social issues, and rather liberal. I have many very good friends that are conservative (in many aspects i share their value system, most of my relatives are conservative as well), and many others that are social-democrat. Some of them are actively involved in the respective political parties in Europe.

Some of my friends.... Love it!

[hanuman1]

Yes, I was wondering whether or not this sticker was from the UDD or a different, smaller faction. To people who hate the red shirts of course it makes no difference. This is a problem for the red shirt movement as friction between its factions - which there undoubtedly is - will lead to observers criticizing the entire movement for the actions of one faction.

One thing I'd like to know is how much better the average Thai voter of whichever political persuasion understands the makeup of the red shirt movement than, say, the average anti-red shirt poster on TVF. After all, it's the Thais who count when determining the extent of public support for whatever political group.

In the OP articles that fuel these threads, little attention is drawn to the factional makeup of the red shirt movement and I'm just wondering if the same can be said for articles in the Thai media in general, as my knowledge of Thai isn't good enough to understand the more formal language used in these publications.

Push, push a little harder and someone will complain it is a fake red sticker designed to discredit the reds. We're almost there with the well maybe just a faction of the reds, a small faction not really representative and so on. Funny how the reds seems always to provide plenty, but plenty of ammunition to feed those they accuse of being Thaksin/reds haters. Twisting in the wind.

Sun Tzu in 'The Art of War' said 'Know your enemy'. I guess you think that's BS. Too much like hard work, eh?

[nicknostitz]

The Stalinist method of saying one thing and doing something else entirely is alive and well. One of the Stalinist traditions is that of the Popular Front (see both the 1930s and the Life of Brian) Unfortunately selling the popular front in Thailand by the remnants of the CP amounts to nothing more than tail-ending Thaksin who is happy to use them and spit them out whenever he fancies doing so.

McCarthyist hysterics ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism ) really do not bode well for this discussion. If you could substantiate your points with evidence other than your vitriol, and leave your impolite comments to yourself then maybe this could for once not end in the usual infantile tit-for-tat that any discussion regarding the Red Shirts on Thaivisa inevitably seems to degenerate into.

Quite sad...

[Siam Simon]

[

You will note that I said the basis of modern journalism is "sound reasoning based on facts." (I am indeed aware of fact checking and fact checkers, thank you.) You of course recognize I am posting about general circulation daily and Sunday newspapers. As to specialization, reading the Economist or watching Bloomberg, I get a lot of facts, sources, and much else too by way of opinion (along with the appropriate disclaimers).

I take it that by "gutter journalism" you refer to the Murdoch clan and Board of Directors (excepting the WSJ)?

I think we also could agree that Journalism in a democracy such as Thailand's is comparable to the parliamentary system. As we would not expect the Thai parliamentary system to be of the same caliber and quality as that of the UK (ahem), neither should we expect Thai English language journalism to be on a par with the Times whether in London or New York - or the Washington Post for that matter. In 2007 after Thaksin was kicked out of Hong Kong, Phillip Bowering wrote an opinion column in the South China Morning Post that, if the former PM were to return to Thailand, he might do well to have learned something of the democratic government of HKG and to consider some of it as perhaps suitable to Thailand.

None of the publications mentioned by have ever been anything else than staunchly traditional in their journalistic approach.

Thanong's little scribbling is neither factual nor sound, as i have shown.

And you posting is neither as well - first you state that BP and the Nation are international standard publications, now you draw a rather strange parallel between the parliament and the quality of newpapers (Apples...Oranges...?), and now you state that BP and the Nation now cannot be compared to international standard publications. If you want to make a point, you can't change your line of argumentation just as convenient to you - that is usually just the reserve of politicians.

Government, politics, democracy, journalism are intertwined. They are perhaps a fruit salad. To try to apply the anaology of apples and oranges is wrong, self-limiting, off-center.

Kindly don't try to put words in my mouth either. Point out where I said the Nation and the BP are "international standard publications." You can't point it out because you said that, not me. I said the Nation and the BP are "respectable" journalism. Your disagreeing with Thanong's piece is insufficient grounds to claim it isn't journalism. If you or an actual journalist have facts that contradict Thanong's facts and interpretation, then present them for our consideration rather than issuing summary and arbitrary denounciatations of his soundly respectable journalism.

"If you or an actual journalist have facts that contradict Thanong's facts and interpretation, then present them for our consideration rather than issuing summary and arbitrary denounciatations of his soundly respectable journalism."

Take the time to read the dam_n thread, man. nicknostitz has already done what you request.

[Siam Simon]

The Stalinist method of saying one thing and doing something else entirely is alive and well. One of the Stalinist traditions is that of the Popular Front (see both the 1930s and the Life of Brian) Unfortunately selling the popular front in Thailand by the remnants of the CP amounts to nothing more than tail-ending Thaksin who is happy to use them and spit them out whenever he fancies doing so.

McCarthyist hysterics ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism ) really do not bode well for this discussion. If you could substantiate your points with evidence other than your vitriol, and leave your impolite comments to yourself then maybe this could for once not end in the usual infantile tit-for-tat that any discussion regarding the Red Shirts on Thaivisa inevitably seems to degenerate into.

Quite sad...

And then he tries to degrade the discussion still further with his "Some of my friends" jibe (which you didn't actually write in your post that he quoted).

[whybother]

And then he tries to degrade the discussion still further with his "Some of my friends" jibe (which you didn't actually write in your post that he quoted).

I have had several school friends

Close enough?

[yoshiwara]

The Stalinist method of saying one thing and doing something else entirely is alive and well. One of the Stalinist traditions is that of the Popular Front (see both the 1930s and the Life of Brian) Unfortunately selling the popular front in Thailand by the remnants of the CP amounts to nothing more than tail-ending Thaksin who is happy to use them and spit them out whenever he fancies doing so.

McCarthyist hysterics ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism ) really do not bode well for this discussion. If you could substantiate your points with evidence other than your vitriol, and leave your impolite comments to yourself then maybe this could for once not end in the usual infantile tit-for-tat that any discussion regarding the Red Shirts on Thaivisa inevitably seems to degenerate into.

Quite sad...

Those fellow travellers who wish to cover for the still Stalinist CP (not allies, oh no) beavering away laying supine in the pocket of the Thaksin project like to show off their new democratic clothes rapidly purchased after the 1989 collapse of the rotten autocratic Russian system. Unfortunately when they yell McCarthyism they conveniently forget the other side show-trials running at the same time. Some habits die hard. Do zebras lose their stripes? We have seen nothing from the red cheerleaders which provides an independent class perspective. Bottom line? Toe the line. Some people protesteth too much. The red shirts may have a left cover, but it is thoroughly threadbare and irrelevant. Just so much more difficult to sing a left-wing song for in government now. Never mind.

Edited November 1, 2011 by yoshiwara

[jayboy]

Simple and focussed and this is what drives the Thaksin apologists up the wall however much they attempt to re-write and re-manipulate the agenda.

For the uninitiated, this member always refers to "Thaksin apologists" whenever encountering opposition to his views.It would be instructive, taking him at face value,to hear exactly what he believes the Thaksinite agenda is.Then we could understand in his world view what the "apologists" actually want.Otherwise his Rainman type "Thaksin apologists" mantra belongs in the playground.

[yoshiwara]

Simple and focussed and this is what drives the Thaksin apologists up the wall however much they attempt to re-write and re-manipulate the agenda.

For the uninitiated, this member always refers to "Thaksin apologists" whenever encountering opposition to his views.It would be instructive, taking him at face value,to hear exactly what he believes the Thaksinite agenda is.Then we could understand in his world view what the "apologists" actually want.Otherwise his Rainman type "Thaksin apologists" mantra belongs in the playground.

They strike such an innocent pose as if they don't know. It does not require overly complicated understanding and that is why it is quite easy for even the red cheerleaders to apply and of course simultaneously deny as it is a thoroughly dirty agenda. Quite simply the agenda is to provide the support for Thaksin to both restore and extend his control over Thailand. On the forum an ideological Praetorian Guard. For the mainstream red thugs the crumbs of payment is sufficient, for the ersatz left supporters their job is to provide both cover for the thugs and lines of defence for Thaksin. For Thaksin they are the useful fools. What gets them excited as they think they are hitching a ride on the red horse (in practice they are the ones being ridden)is the crumbling idea of class support (but wrapped in the real politic of shutting mouths when it comes to the North-Eastern landowners)and more importantly a republican agenda which they try desperately not to allude to but just seems to slip out every so often like some wardrobe malfunction. They are neither the uninitiated nor clean. When push comes to shove they stand in front of, behind and at the side of the Arismans and Jatuporns of this world. That's their job. The rag, tag and bobtail apologists.

[animatic]

The Stalinist method of saying one thing and doing something else entirely is alive and well. One of the Stalinist traditions is that of the Popular Front (see both the 1930s and the Life of Brian) Unfortunately selling the popular front in Thailand by the remnants of the CP amounts to nothing more than tail-ending Thaksin who is happy to use them and spit them out whenever he fancies doing so.

McCarthyist hysterics ( http://en.wikipedia....iki/McCarthyism ) really do not bode well for this discussion. If you could substantiate your points with evidence other than your vitriol, and leave your impolite comments to yourself then maybe this could for once not end in the usual infantile tit-for-tat that any discussion regarding the Red Shirts on Thaivisa inevitably seems to degenerate into.

Quite sad...

Is this a debating society disputing concepts, or reportage of facts in dispute?

Playing the 'McCarthy Card' doesn't win an argument... except ad hominem.

That's the same as using the Hitler card. Automatic Fail.

"hysterics", "impolite", "vitriol", "infantile tit-for-tat", "degenerate"....

Words bound to win any polite argument.

On the topic:

It is a statement of observance, not a statement of 100% confirmed facts:

one man sees a pattern similar to historical past occurrences,

and another doesn't grasp it's significance, or dislikes the implications, and disputes it.

Yosh's point being that it's clear to many that Thaksin doesn't care who he uses to regain power, even the strangest of bedmates, because his history also shows he is more than willing to jettison any and all partners if they are no longer useful to his plans.

Edited November 1, 2011 by animatic

[serenitynow]

It may not be about Thaksin any more.......

What do you think if that is true ???

I think that would be a fantastically positive development if it were true. Aside from the factionalization and no one ever taking responsibility for criminal acts commited, I think peoples chief objections to this amorphous movement is that a criminal cabal seems to overlaid itself upon it and calls itself their leaders. I wish those people would clean out the garbage, but I'm not hopeful at all.

For the foreseeable future Thaksin will stay a large part, or symbol, of this movement as a whole, even if there are minority groups under the Red Shirts that dislike Thaksin almost as much as the Democrats. For those groups mostly though their idea of changes are quite more... lets say... radical.

But regardless, people who do like Thaksin have the right to like him. They have voted for him, and their vote was taken away by the 2006 military coup. It does not really matter if us foreigners here like him or not - it is Thais that cast their vote, and have to decide over who will be their prime minister, and not us. The same way, people who dislike Thaksin, and will note vote for him (or whoever stands in his place) have a right to feel that way.

Sure they have the right to like him and every other criminal that suits their fancy. That doesn't mean the rest of the Thai people don't have the right to bring those criminals to justice. They really don't seem to have the least idea of what a democracy entails and their leadership works hard to keep it that way.

Edited November 1, 2011 by serenitynow

[nicknostitz]

It may not be about Thaksin any more.......

What do you think if that is true ???

I think that would be a fantastically positive development if it were true. Aside from the factionalization and no one ever taking responsibility for criminal acts commited, I think peoples chief objections to this amorphous movement is that a criminal cabal seems to overlaid itself upon it and calls itself their leaders. I wish those people would clean out the garbage, but I'm not hopeful at all.

For the foreseeable future Thaksin will stay a large part, or symbol, of this movement as a whole, even if there are minority groups under the Red Shirts that dislike Thaksin almost as much as the Democrats. For those groups mostly though their idea of changes are quite more... lets say... radical.

But regardless, people who do like Thaksin have the right to like him. They have voted for him, and their vote was taken away by the 2006 military coup. It does not really matter if us foreigners here like him or not - it is Thais that cast their vote, and have to decide over who will be their prime minister, and not us. The same way, people who dislike Thaksin, and will note vote for him (or whoever stands in his place) have a right to feel that way.

Sure they have the right to like him and every other criminal that suits their fancy. That doesn't mean the rest of the Thai people don't have the right to bring those criminals to justice. They really don't seem to have the least idea of what a democracy entails and their leadership works hard to keep it that way.

What complicates the matter is that there was a military coup in 2006 against Thaksin, who was the two time elected prime minister (5 times, actually, sort of, if you count the nullified 2006 elections, and the two post coup elections, and yes - i am aware of the fact that at the time of the coup he was caretaker PM, which still does not legitimize the coup), which in itself is a treasonable charge, and not exactly what democracy entails. There are many Thais that would like to see the coup makers brought to justice as well, regardless of the self-written amnesty in the constitution sponsored by the coup makers.

So many crimes, so many criminals...

To be consistent in your stand for democracy, and to be objective - please support also a charge against the coup makers as well, not just against Thaksin. Otherwise you could be accused of bias...

And before anyone accused me again of being a "Thaksin apologist" - i have no real problem with charges against Thaksin, as long as it is a free and fair trial, and as long as his collaborators, etc. are not spared - which is quite impossible.

Edited November 1, 2011 by nicknostitz

[longway]

^ This is why the reds are not a democracy movement, they only are interested their side getting the benefit of the double standard. Thaksin ran away when he found out he could be found guilty of something, his world must have turned upside down, he has never stopped whining about it since.

Edited November 1, 2011 by longway

[TAWP]

And before anyone accused me again of being a "Thaksin apologist" - i have no real problem with charges against Thaksin, as long as it is a free and fair trial, and as long as his collaborators, etc. are not spared - which is quite impossible.

So unless the coup-makers are charged Thaksin should not be charged for the crimes that lead up to the coup and that would never have reached the court system if he wasn't ousted?

Why should his charges depend on charges against others? Why can't we start somewhere and hope we down the line end up with all criminals in jail and out of power, even if it takes some time?

[nicknostitz]

And before anyone accused me again of being a "Thaksin apologist" - i have no real problem with charges against Thaksin, as long as it is a free and fair trial, and as long as his collaborators, etc. are not spared - which is quite impossible.

So unless the coup-makers are charged Thaksin should not be charged for the crimes that lead up to the coup and that would never have reached the court system if he wasn't ousted?

Why should his charges depend on charges against others? Why can't we start somewhere and hope we down the line end up with all criminals in jail and out of power, even if it takes some time?

I don't think that i have said what you imply.

Again - i find it rather inconsistent by posters that cry for Thaksin to be brought to justice for his alleged crimes against democracy, and the same time ignore the 2006 military coup, which is also a crime against democracy.

As to who is supposed to be on trial or not, i personally would like to refrain from airing my views on this here right now.